Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36763224›Full record

SynthesisJournal of thrombosis and thrombolysis2023

Efficacy and safety of prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism in brain neoplasm patients undergoing neurosurgery: a systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Deshan Liu, Dixiang Song, Weihai Ning, Xiaoyu Zhang, Shengyun Chen, Hongwei Zhang

Abstract readSystematic ReviewNetwork Meta-Analysis
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of thrombosis and thrombolysis, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Evaluation of primary venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in hospitalized patients with primary brain tumors or secondary brain metastases.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Deshan Liu *Department of Neurosurgery, Sanbo Brain Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100093, China.
Dixiang Song *Department of Neurosurgery, Sanbo Brain Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100093, China.
Weihai NingDepartment of Neurosurgery, Sanbo Brain Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100093, China.
Xiaoyu ZhangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Sanbo Brain Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100093, China.
Shengyun ChenDepartment of Cerebralvascular Center, Beijing Sanbo Brain Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100093, China.
Hongwei ZhangDepartment of Neurosurgery, Sanbo Brain Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, 100093, China. zhanghongwei@ccmu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4508-7678
Capital Medical University · CN

Funding

Key Technologies Research and Development Program 2020YFC2004706
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Neurosurgeons often face this dilemma. Brain neoplasm patients undergoing neurosurgery are at a high risk of venous thrombosis. However, antithrombotic drugs may induce bleeding complications. Therefore, we compared the efficacy and safety of prophylaxis for venous thromboembolism (VTE) in brain neoplasm patients undergoing neurosurgery. We searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE(R), and Embase from inception to January 2022 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the prophylactic measures efficacy and safety for VTE in brain neoplasm patients undergoing neurosurgery. The main efficacy outcome was symptomatic or asymptomatic VTE. The safety outcomes included major bleeding, minor bleeding, all occurrences of bleeding, and all-cause mortality. We used (Log) odds ratio (OR) of various chemoprophylaxis regimens to judge the safety and effectiveness of VTE. Additionally, all types of intervention were ranked by the Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking (SUCRA) value. We included 10 RCTs with 1128 brain neoplasm patients undergoing neurosurgery. For symptomatic or asymptomatic VTE and proximal DVT or PE, DOACs, compared with placebo, can significantly reduce the events. DOACs were superior to all other interventions in the rank plot of these events. For major bleeding reduction, unfractionated heparin (SUCRA value = 0.21) demonstrated better safety efficacy than others. For minor bleeding reduction, DOACs had a significantly higher risk of minor bleeding compared with placebo [Log OR 16.76, 95% CrI (1.53, 61.13)], LMWH [Log OR 15.68, 95% CrI (0.26, 60.10)] and UFH [Log OR 15.93, 95% CrI (0.22, 60.16)] respectively. Except for placebo (SUCRA values of 0.13), UFH (SUCRA values of 0.37) depicted better safety efficacy than others. For all-cause mortality, we found UFH always had significantly lower all-cause mortality compared with low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) [Log OR = 14.17, 95% CrI (0.05, 48.35)]. UFH plus intermittent pneumatic compression (IPC) (SUCRA value of 0.12) displayed the best safety for all-cause mortality. In our study, DOACs were more effective as prophylaxis for VTE in brain neoplasm patients undergoing neurosurgery. Regarding the safety of prophylaxis for VTE, UFH of chemoprophylaxis consistently demonstrated better safety efficacy, involving either major bleeding, minor bleeding, bleeding, or all-cause mortality.

Indexed as

Brain NeoplasmsNeurosurgeryVenous ThromboembolismAnticoagulantsHemorrhageHeparinHeparin, Low-Molecular-WeightHumansAnticoagulantsHeparinHeparin, Low-Molecular-WeightBrain neoplasmMeta-analysisNeurosurgeryThromboembolism prophylaxis

Identifiers

PMID36763224
OpenAlexW4319827359

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.